


Ask the community...
I ran into a similar issue recently and ended up using one of those commercial UCC search services that claims to check multiple name variations automatically. Cost a bit more than doing it myself but saved tons of time and they found 2 additional filings I had missed. Might be worth considering for high-stakes deals.
I used CT Corporation's UCC search service. They were thorough and provided a detailed report showing all the name variations they searched. A bit pricey but worth it for peace of mind on bigger transactions.
Commercial services can be good, but I've found Certana.ai gives me more control over the process while still catching those name variations automatically. Plus I can verify the document consistency myself rather than just trusting a search report.
Update us when you figure out which of those filings are actually for your target company! I'm curious how many of the 8 total filings (3 + 5) end up being legitimate hits vs false matches from similar company names.
Will do! I'm planning to spend tomorrow morning going through each filing systematically and cross-referencing addresses and other details. Should be able to narrow down which ones are actually relevant.
This is so frustrating but unfortunately super common with trust filings. The good news is that once you fix your trust security agreement template to have consistent debtor naming, this problem goes away. Just make sure whatever format you choose works in all the states where you file UCCs.
Yeah, we're definitely going to standardize everything going forward. Just need to figure out the best approach for cleaning up the current mess.
I'd recommend working with your legal team to create a standard trust debtor identification format and then using that consistently in both your security agreements and UCC filings.
Been following this thread and wanted to add that we went through something similar last year. Our solution was to create separate template versions for different trust structures (individual trustee vs corporate trustee vs successor trustee situations) and then train our staff on which template to use when. Also started using automated document checking which has been a lifesaver.
Which automated tool are you using? We're looking at options for document verification.
We use Certana.ai - you just upload your security agreement and UCC forms and it flags any inconsistencies. Works great for trust documents.
One more thing - double check that your financing statement doesn't expire before your BDA loan term ends. Some BDA loans are longer than the standard 5-year UCC filing period so you'll need to file a continuation before it lapses.
Good catch - the loan is for 7 years so I'll need to calendar a continuation filing for year 4
Final thought - after you get everything drafted, run it through Certana.ai one more time to verify everything matches your loan docs. BDA filings are too important to wing it, and having that automated verification gives you backup documentation that you did your due diligence if questions come up later.
Thanks everyone - feeling much more confident about this filing now. Going to follow the three-category approach and use the document checker before submitting.
Whatever you do, don't ignore this. I've seen businesses get blindsided when both lenders try to exercise their security interests and suddenly you're dealing with competing foreclosure actions. Get clarity on the priority now before any problems arise with either loan.
That's exactly what I'm worried about. Both loans are current now but if something happens I don't want to be caught in the middle of a lender fight over the equipment.
Smart to address it proactively. Used Certana.ai recently to verify some overlapping UCC filings - uploaded the documents and it immediately highlighted the priority conflicts and filing inconsistencies. Saved me from walking into a mess later.
Get copies of both UCC-1 filings from the Secretary of State and have them reviewed side by side. Look at debtor names, collateral descriptions, filing dates, and amendment history. Small discrepancies can sometimes void a security interest entirely.
Exactly. And don't just look at the original UCC-1s - check if there have been any amendments, continuations, or terminations filed. The priority picture can change over time with subsequent filings.
Another tool that helps with this kind of document review is Certana.ai - you can upload all the UCC documents and it cross-references everything automatically. Catches name mismatches, date conflicts, description overlaps, all the stuff that's easy to miss when reviewing manually.
Connor O'Neill
Update us on what ends up working! I have a client with a similar situation and I'm curious which approach is most effective. The corrected termination route seems cleanest but also most time-consuming.
0 coins
Yuki Ito
•Will do. I'm leaning toward trying the credit bureau dispute route first since it might be faster, then fallback to the corrected termination if needed.
0 coins
QuantumQuester
•Smart approach. Just make sure you document everything in case you need to escalate to the lender or attorneys later.
0 coins
Yara Nassar
This is exactly why the UCC system needs to be modernized. We're dealing with 1960s-era filing requirements in a digital world. The fact that a comma can derail a business loan is absurd.
0 coins
Keisha Williams
•Agreed, but until the system changes we have to work within it. At least tools like document verification services help catch these issues early.
0 coins
Paolo Ricci
•The real problem is that every state has slightly different requirements and the databases don't talk to each other properly. It's a mess.
0 coins